Because I so often agree with Cuban, I have difficulty understanding the logic behind his recent criticism of Facebook (FB) .

Maybe you saw the Tweet from late October. Cuban lashed out at Facebook for soliciting more money from him to reach a larger audience with his Dallas Mavericks Facebook page.

With that, this week Cuban apparently decided to go in a different direction. While he will not dump Facebook completely, it sounds like he'll deemphasize it.

He probably should diversify his exposure. Keep it fluid. The NBA has a broad fan base; it makes sense to hit various forms of media, online and off.

But why reduce Facebook because they, for all intents and purposes, charge a sliding scale for ad space? Reach more people, pay more money.

If Cuban wanted to run a Mavs promo during the Super Bowl it would likely cost more for 30 seconds than it would to buy a full load of ads on 60 Minutes . In fact, it probably costs less to be on the lengthy Super Bowl pregame show than it does to get placed at halftime or some other prime slot.

Pretty simple concept to grasp.

It should worry investors -- and Cuban is one of the world's best -- if Facebook charged one price across the board.

If you want to get into the 2 million-user territory, you should have to pay a grand or two more.

If Facebook geeks its algorithm to prevent spam or puts the most engaging ads to the top, good for Facebook!

That's the direction television should head in. And, from this standpoint, Facebook isn't all that different than TV.

Facebook has made everything around it more social. Along with Twitter, Pandora (P) and other new/social media leaders, we're not only becoming more social, our content ends up more personalized.

In fact, we need a more, not less, dynamic model. One that measures and rewards impact on both sides of the equation.

If an audience responds positively to your ad, it receives more prominent placement.

Marry this engagement with the platform's reach to ensure advertisers pay what's right; Facebook charges a reasonable and relatively objective rate; and creative teams and advertisers work harder to produce advertisements that look more like compelling content than intrusions or spam.